Barbadian jurist, Dr. Richard Cheltenham has the necessary authority to travel to the United States and solicit the evidence of key american witnesses in the Briefcase Inquiry involving Grenada Prime Minister Dr. Keith Mitchell.

"....The commission is vested with authority to take evidence abroad", Dr. Cheltenham stated August 13, 2004 in his opening statement at the official start of the inquiry.

Prime Minister Mitchell is under investigation for allegding taking a bribe of $US500, 000.00 from international fraudster Eric Resteiner of the United States for a diplomatic position with the ruling New National Party (NNP) administration.

Reports have been circulating in the country in recent days from certain quarters that Dr. Cheltenham will be restricted to holding sitting only in Grenada and cannot venture outside of the jurisdiction. Three of the key witneses - Eric Resteiner, David Marchant and Timothy Bass- live in the United States.

Both Marchant and Bass are said to be willing to co-operate with the inquiry but prefer to give their evidence against the Prime Minister from within the United States. Dr. Cheltenham told the opening session: "To the extent that they (Bass, Marchant and Resteiner) live outside of Grenada, I have no authority to compel them to testify. If therefore they are unwilling or unable to come to Grenada to testify, but are prepared to testify should the Commission come to them, arrangements will have to be made for the Commission to go to them. I should add that the commission is vested with authority to take evidence abroad.

"In that event, it will be necessary to do whatever is feasible and realistic to ensure that the public of Grenada hear, and if convenient, see the testimony of these witnesses. At minimum, the testimony will be taped and transcribed. The tapes can thereafter be played for the benefit of the people of Grenada and the transcripts can form an appendix to the report", he told the commission hearing.

Following is an edited version of Dr. Cheltenham's opening statement at the Briefcase Inquiry:.

The heart of the inquiry will require that I probe as carefully and fully as the evidence will permit the truth or otherwise of allegations which appeared in the publication known as Offshore Alert of April 30th last to the effect that the Honourable Prime Minister - Dr. Keith Mitchell - accepted US half million dollars as a bribe from one Eric Resteiner who was at the time of the alleged acceptance a diplomatic representative of the State of Grenada.

Two facts in relation to this matter must be noted at this point. The first is that the journal Offshore Alert is published in Miami, in the State of Florida in the United States of America, and it is as far as we know there in Miami that the Editor and proprietor of the journal resides.

His testimony may be vital to the inquiry. The Commission will be anxious to hear evidence from him concerning the report in Offshore Alert.

Secondly, the alleged transaction into which I will be inquiring did not take place here in Grenada. Rather, it is supposed to have taken place in St. Moritz, Switzerland on or about June 25th, 2000.

Both Resteiner himself and his Director of Security, so called, a man by the name of Timothy Bass, are central to the Inquiry. Our first task is really to find the whereabouts of these gentlemen.

The Commissioner of Police and the senior officer, ASP Francois, who heads the investigation, are hard at work trying to locate them.

When they are found and I refer to the Editor of Offshore Alert, Resteiner and Bass, it will be necessary to determine whether they are prepared to come to Grenada at the Government's expense and testify.

That will be the ideal arrangement. For it will allow the people of Grenada to see and hear for themselves the testimony of these witnesses, assess their demeanour and weigh their responses to the many questions that will be asked in the course of cross examination.

To the extent that they will live outside of Grenada, I have no authority to compel them to testify. If therefore they are unwilling or unable to come to Grenada to testify, but are prepared to testify should the Commission come to them, arrangements will have to be made for the Commission to go to them. I should add that the commission is vested with authority to take evidence abroad.

In that event, it will be necessary to do whatever is feasible and realistic to ensure that the public of Grenada hear, and if convenient, see the testimony of these witnesses.

At minimum, the testimony will be taped and transcribed. The tapes can thereafter be played for the benefit of the people of Grenada and the transcripts can form an appendix to the report. But should it be necessary for the Commission to go to these gentlemen, I shall invite all the participants in the Inquiry or their counsel to provide their views on how best the matter should be handled bearing in mind that it will be necessary to preserve the public nature of the Inquiry and taking into consideration that costs will be a relevant factor.

One further implication of this scenario under discussion should be made explicit. Should it be necessary for the Commission to go abroad to receive evidence, it will in all probability disturb the already tight time frame indicated in my Warrant of Appointment which calls for my report to be submitted to the Governor General within thirty (30) days of the1st formal sitting of the Commission.

The answer to this matter should it arise is simply for me to go back to the sponsoring authority, the Governor General, and respectfully request an enlargement of the time within which I shall be expected to report.

Dr. Mitchell himself will be an important witness in this inquiry and he will be required, like all other witnesses, to provide a statement prior to testifying on the issues which touch and concern him.

The second area of the Inquiry addressed the circumstances surrounding the appointment of Eric Resteiner as a diplomatic representative of the State of Grenada.
This aspect of the Inquiry is obviously linked to the broader question of what criteria exist and what protocol is in place (any) regulating the appointment of non-Grenadians to diplomatic (appointments) positions.

The Prime Minister had admitted to dealing with Mr. Resteiner on a limited basis only. He said, as I understand it, that he received US$15,000.00 approximately from Resteiner and that figure represented expenses incurred by himself and other public officials who accompanied him on the visit to certain European countries and Kuwait.
This in turn gives rise to the question of what procedures are in place for the reimbursement of authorized expenses by Members of Government and other public officials, incurred in connection with official travel and other legitimate expenses appertaining thereto.

The Inquiry into these aspects of the terms of reference will call for evidence from some public officials some of whom may be retired as well as from parliamentarians who served or are currently serving in executive capacities. Their knowledge of financial practices in relation to Government business can be helpful.

The third area of this inquiry will be necessary only if criticism can properly be made of the existing systems both for the appointment of non-Grenadians to the diplomatic service and for the reimbursement of authorized expenditure incurred by Ministers and public officials in the course of travelling abroad on Government business.

Should it be necessary, it will be my responsibility to make proposals for the improvement of these systems and for the correction of any deficiencies identified.
And I should emphasize that I would first wish to hear from those who are experienced in these matters or who have useful ideas as to how best the systems to which I have referred can and should be improved.